nec2_create_yagi

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits but only says 'Create'. It does not mention side effects (e.g., saving to database), default values for optional parameters, or any constraints like element length computation. The agent cannot infer the tool's internal behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is one sentence with no fluff. It is concise, but could be slightly improved by mentioning that the antenna is added to the list (if that is the behavior). However, it is still effective.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given 4 parameters (2 required), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not state what the tool returns, whether it modifies state, or how the created antenna is stored. Essential context for a creation tool is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description hints at 'num_directors' but adds no new meaning beyond the schema. It does not explain parameter interactions or provide examples.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Create a Yagi-Uda directional antenna', specifying the verb and resource. It also mentions the key parameter 'number of directors', and the tool name itself distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'dipole' or 'vertical'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., for directional vs omnidirectional patterns). There is no mention of prerequisites, scenarios, or comparisons with sibling tools.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.